HOW TO THINK ABOUT IT

What was the deal? Peace talks so far had hammered out a largely classified peace deal under which the U.S. would gradually phase troops out of Afghanistan over 16 months. In return, the Taliban would have to provide assurances that it would follow the constitution of democratic Afghanistan — including the rights of women — and wouldn’t allow the country’s soil to be used for launching terrorist attacks against others. But as former CIA Deputy Director John McLaughlin writes as part of OZY’s latest original series, After The Longest War, trusting the Taliban is a risky proposition.

The unlikely guarantor of peace. On the surface, China and the U.S. are locked in a brutal trade war that only seems to get worse with each passing week. But there’s also growing recognition in Washington that any deal with the Taliban — and hopes for stability in a future Afghanistan — could hinge on China’s help. No other country enjoys China’s influence with both the elected Afghan government and with Pakistan — which has sheltered and supported the Taliban since the 1990s. China’s the biggest investor in both countries — and those investments in Afghanistan give it a reason to strive for peace there.

But who wants that role? Neither China, nor any other major regional power, wants to fill the void that a U.S. withdrawal would create in Afghanistan. The country is a vital security concern for Russia, China, India and Iran. But they’ve all repeatedly rejected American requests to send soldiers to Afghanistan, a country that through its history has refused to be controlled by major empires: from czarist Russia and Britain to the Soviet Union and now the United States. Afghanistan’s own security forces are woefully ill-equipped to tackle the Taliban and other militant groups on their own. American soldiers in Afghanistan represent the best bet for Moscow, New Delhi, Beijing and Tehran.

Trump’s not done. When asked on Sunday after the collapse of talks whether this could mean years before the withdrawal of troops actually happens, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said, “I hope not.” Ultimately, Trump and the Taliban have the same objective: U.S. withdrawal. Trump’s also known to like a showy move — hosting the Taliban at Camp David would certainly qualify — leading experts to suspect they’ll be back at the negotiating table soon enough despite any accumulated bad blood.

WHAT TO READ

Trump Smells a Bad Deal, Makes the Right Call on Taliban Peace Talks, by Peter Bergen on CNN
“However, you dress it up, Khalilzad is negotiating a withdrawal agreement with the Taliban, not a peace agreement. Simply because the U.S. withdraws its troops from a conflict doesn't mean the war is over.”

How Trump’s Plan to Secretly Meet with the Taliban Came Together, and Fell Apart, by Peter Baker, Mujib Mashal and Michael Crowley in the New York Times
“And even after it fell apart, Mr. Trump took it upon himself to disclose the secret machinations in a string of Saturday night Twitter messages that surprised not only many national security officials across the government but even some of the few who were part of the deliberations.”

WHAT TO WATCH